Faculty Governance Commmittee

Faculty Governance Committee Report

Second Report of the Faculty Governance Committee

The membership of the Faculty Governance Committee was announced at the April Senate meeting. The members are:

Raymond J. Ball, Simon School, BALL@SSB.ROCHESTER.EDU
Eldred Chimowitz, College, CHIM@CHE.ROCHESTER.EDU
Donna Brink Fox, Eastman School of Music, dbfx@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
Robert J. Joynt, School of Medicine and Dentistry, rjoynt@mail.neurology.rochester.edu
Douglas C. Ravenel, College, Chair, drav@math.rochester.edu
Madeline Schmitt, School of Nursing, Madeline_Schmitt@URMC.Rochester.edu
William Simon, School of Medicine and Dentistry, wsimon@biophysics.rochester.edu
Harold Wechsler, Warner School, HWCR@TROI.CC.ROCHESTER.EDU
Robert Westbrook, College, RWBK@DB1.CC.ROCHESTER.EDU

CHARGE FOR THE FACULTY GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE

The recent involvement of the Faculty Senate and several faculty committees in the revision of the Faculty Handbook showed a promising spirit of cooperation between the faculty and the university administration. At its November and December meetings the Faculty Senate voted to "appoint a committee to study faculty governance issues, including but not limited to the mechanism for amending the Handbook and the mechanism for revoking tenure."

This committee should explore ways in which the faculty could cooperate with the administration and Board of Trustees in making decisions about the future of the University which have particular impact on the faculty role in the University.

The kind of issues for consideration could include the following:

The mechanism for revising the faculty handbook, and the role of the Faculty Senate in this process.
The mechanism for revoking tenure, either for cause or for reasons of financial exigency. For the former: are the present rules defining the role of the University Committee on Tenure and Privileges clear, adequate, and fair? For the latter, is it possible to define 'financial exigency' more precisely and its consequences more clearly? What should happen to tenured faculty in a department, school or program that has been closed? What procedures should be followed, and how might the faculty be involved?
The role of the Faculty Senate: can its participation in decision making be enhanced? This might include methods for increasing faculty awareness of and interest in university issues.
Mechanism for consultation with the Trustees on specific issues, e.g., through the Trustees' Committee on Academic Affairs.
Faculty governance at the various schools within UR: do the faculties have adequate rules and procedures for carrying out their expected roles?
Should the faculty have a role in helping to formulate university policy on issues such as sexual and racial harassment - given that these issues have impact on more than just the faculty?

In studying these and related topics, the committee should solicit the views of interested faculty, administrators and trustees. It may want to explore methods of faculty governance at comparable universities and the standards of faculty governance established by the AAUP.

The committee should summarize its findings and recommendations in one (or more) written reports, with presentations to the Faculty Senate. We would ask for a report to the Senate at or before the November, 1999, meeting. At that time it may ask for more time to complete its work if necessary.

Copyright by University of Rochester
Faculty Senate site created Monday, June 29, 1998, by William Simon wsimon@biophysics.rochester.edu
Maintained by Lynne Hasman.
This page last revised March 5, 2004.